Well, anyone can do anything they’d like with their blog, I just don’t understand what the link is between birthers and truthers. I don’t hang out at Red State, so I really couldn’t say for sure, but was there really a problem with truthers in the comments section? Or was this a not so subtle way to conflate a truly deranged group of people, the truthers, with birthers, a group largely composed of people who are accurate when they say that the president has too much personal secrecy?
It has also been my experience that truthers are most predominantly left-wing, hating Bush, or even America, so much so that they believe he was behind 9/11. I ‘m sure there are people who hate Obama as much, and they would believe and advocate for just about anything that would get him thrown out of office. But that is not the case for many people who are reasonably concerned that Obama was not properly vetted. They should remain silent or be banned from Red State as well?
In Erickson’s post announcing his decision he continually called these people “birfers,” rather than the slightly less insulting term “birthers.” He has also said that it’s imperative to keep these loonies away from the Tea Party Movement, in the belief that Tea Baggers, as they are called by the left, are going to be taken seriously if they purge themselves of the birthers. The Tea Party Movement will gain respectability from the left the day they all throw themselves off a cliff into a jagged abyss. I never fail to marvel at people on the right that fail to see this. If you are conservative, you’re already nuts as far as the left is concerned, whether you are a birther or not.
This is a comment left by a man named Bob Frazier who I feel puts this in it’s proper perspective.